Joe Molotov
Member
I think this is actually the best possible result.
I got Sotomayor too. We should rub one out together (no gay stuff, tho).
I think this is actually the best possible result.
I got Sotomayor too. We should rub one out together (no gay stuff, tho).
Reparations are pointless. Just handing out money isn't going to do the best job in aiding impoverished black communities. There needs to be investment in education, better community support, and redistributing wages for low wage jobs.
read the article, i can tell you haven't
That's every thread, I'm not taking this bet. Can't fool me again.Create a thread about it and I guarantee most of the responses will be from people who didn't read the article.
So then pelosi's giving republicans the full power to say "a bipartisan committee has found Obama and Hillary complicit in misdeeds regarding Benghazi".
I don't know if that sentence means anything to the average voter, but the nightly news and Sunday shows just eat that crap up, which does eventually change the average voter's views. Imagine how differently those shows would have covered the ACA if a few republicans voted for it and publicly played along with the negotiations. I also remember that when the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission came out with their report, the majority's findings were treat as the entire commissions findings, despite cries from the right otherwise.
Maybe it'd work if they use the minority opinion section of the report to call out what a shame the investigation was, but I don't know if I see that coming. Just look at what the ranking democrat on the committee is saying about it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...d-participating-in-benghazi-select-committee/
He's not wrong, but at some point that duty has to be considered fulfilled, and we instead owe it to those Americans to not let people drag out this tragedy for political purposes, and owe it to the family members to let them move on with their lives. You're simply allowing this to happen by playing along with this farce instead of saying that the issue is settled, all relevant information is already out there, and it's time to move on.
Create a thread about it and I guarantee most of the responses will be from people who didn't read the article.
Same, its a really bad gifThis gif seriously makes me not want to read this thread, above any other possible complaint I might have at this time.
This gif seriously makes me not want to read this thread, above any other possible complaint I might have at this time.http://i.imgur.com/4EddMbM.gif
(Reuters) - U.S. Senate Republicans blocked legislation on Thursday that would have expanded federal healthcare and education programs for veterans, saying the $24 billion bill would bust the budget.
Even though the legislation cleared a procedural vote on Tuesday by a 99-0 vote, the measure quickly got bogged down in partisan fighting.
Supporters said the measure would have brought the most significant changes in decades to U.S. veterans' programs. For example, it called for 27 new medical facilities to help a healthcare system that is strained by veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
With Democrats pressing for passage this week, Senate Republicans, backed by their leader, Mitch McConnell, attempted to attach controversial legislation calling for possible new sanctions on Iran that President Barack Obama opposes.
"The issue of Iran sanctions ... has nothing to do with the needs of veterans," complained Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee Chairman Bernard Sanders of Vermont, the main sponsor of the bill.
Haters gonna hate.This gif seriously makes me not want to read this thread, above any other possible complaint I might have at this time.
Edit: Please don't prequote and break post chronology. Make a new post. I know you have 60 seconds between new posts. I do too. It's really not that hard to manage.
You're comparing projectile vomit imagery with benign cartoon portraits.Chichikov said:FWIW, your avatar made me disable avatars, and I had to like learn people names, like in the dark ages.
There's a reason post counts are hidden!I've just tried to cut down on my post numbers.
Will do though
catthingprojectilevomitingblood.gifI'm actually happy people haven't yet responded to the reparations thread, maybe they are actually reading it
It's not vomit, it's blood, get your facts straight.You're comparing projectile vomit imagery with benign cartoon portraits.
This gif seriously makes me not want to read this thread, above any other possible complaint I might have at this time.
APK, alstein: I know I owe you two guys a response. I just got sidetracked.
Edit: Please don't prequote and break post chronology. Make a new post. I know you have 60 seconds between new posts. I do too. It's really not that hard to manage.
Is TIME regarded as being pretty shitty around here? I feel like it gets a pretty bad reputation. My parents still get it and the most recent has the cover story about the increased awareness of sexual assault on campus and I was probably going to read it tomorrow. Kind of amusing since I'm pretty sure it was TIME that had an article with some woman stating that "rape culture" was overblown or overly exposed or something like that.
Full disclosure: I won TIMES person of the year award in 2006, so I might be a bit biased in its favor.Is TIME regarded as being pretty shitty around here? I feel like it gets a pretty bad reputation. My parents still get it and the most recent has the cover story about the increased awareness of sexual assault on campus and I was probably going to read it tomorrow. Kind of amusing since I'm pretty sure it was TIME that had an article with some woman stating that "rape culture" was overblown or overly exposed or something like that.
Misdirected is the better term for that. They felt it took away from the reality that the majority of sexual assaults are by a few repeat offenders.Is TIME regarded as being pretty shitty around here? I feel like it gets a pretty bad reputation. My parents still get it and the most recent has the cover story about the increased awareness of sexual assault on campus and I was probably going to read it tomorrow. Kind of amusing since I'm pretty sure it was TIME that had an article with some woman stating that "rape culture" was overblown or overly exposed or something like that.
Full disclosure: I won TIMES person of the year award in 2006, so I might be a bit biased in its favor.
That is doggone ridiculous. I would love to read Obama's Iran Gamble feature story. No wonder Americans learn about the world from movies.
Oh yes it does interest me.Timothy Geithner did a 42 minute interview with Jon Stewart last night regarding the financial crash of 2008.
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/extended-interviews/z9b8f1/timothy-geithner-extended-interview
Good back and forth if this topic interests you.
Timothy Geithner did a 42 minute interview with Jon Stewart last night regarding the financial crash of 2008.
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/extended-interviews/z9b8f1/timothy-geithner-extended-interview
Good back and forth if this topic interests you.
The chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee is calling on the Obama administration to permit veterans waiting for care at VA hospitals to seek treatment outside that system, if they want.
Rep. Jeff Miller, a Florida Republican, called on President Barack Obama to issue an executive order that would allow those veterans to act on their own and charge the government for outside care.
Timothy Geithner did a 42 minute interview with Jon Stewart last night regarding the financial crash of 2008.
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/extended-interviews/z9b8f1/timothy-geithner-extended-interview
Good back and forth if this topic interests you.
Damn, his administration is that incompetent? /PDObama couldn't fix it all in 4 terms.
Bailing out homeowners is very tricky and can lead to more problems. I am curious to learn what your thoughts are on how to implement such a government program.They sure talked in circles for a long time. Stewart really needed to press Geithner on why Congress didn't authorize them to bail out homeowners or why the administration didn't make a lot of noise about wanting to bail out homeowners in order to pressure Congress into authorizing that. As best I could tell, Geithner's story was that he really wanted to bail out homeowners, that that would have been good policy, that no interest group was opposed to it, and that nevertheless Congress didn't want to allow that and couldn't have been talked into it.
Bailing out homeowners is very tricky and can lead to more problems. I am curious to learn what your thoughts are on how to implement such a government program.
Good, not great, but it's certainly the right direction.Also the FREEDOM ACT passed. Obama worse than Bush
I haven't worked out how one would go about implementing that. But apparently Geithner thought it was a good and feasible idea and only didn't do it because Congress wasn't willing to allow it. That was not the impression I got around that time, when Congressmen were spending a lot of time happily attacking the bailout as a bailout of Wall Street rather than Main Street. So it seems like an obvious thing to ask Geithner to expand on.
There was a lot of constituent anger about poor people getting houses for free, that they couldn't afford in the first place, while they have to work hard and pay their mortgages and nobody was bailing them out.
Bailing out homeowners is very tricky and can lead to more problems. I am curious to learn what your thoughts are on how to implement such a government program.
RIP socialism cat. I hardly knew ye.Yes, please stop posting that gif. It's distracting and disgusting.
Additionally, I'm somewhat curious. Does your government lack a system where people up to a certain level of income are able to apply for housing loans (and only for certain kinds of housing) at a public bank?
RIP socialism cat. I hardly knew ye.
RIP socialism cat. I hardly knew ye.